By Christian Lunghi 

The nationwide noncompete ban is dead. In April 2024, the FTC tried to roll out a sweeping rule that would have voided most noncompetes across the country. Federal courts shut it down. A Texas court vacated the rule in August 2024 for lack of statutory authority, and another court enjoined it under the major-questions doctrine. Fast forward: on September 5, 2025, the FTC—by a 3–1 vote—dismissed its appeals in Ryan, LLC v. FTC and Properties of the Villages v. FTC. That formally ends the rule.

As a result, there is no federal ban in effect. Enforceability is back to what it was before: state law plus the usual contract and antitrust principles.

Read more

By Christian Lunghi 

You’re a contractor. You landed the job, and it’s a solid one. Clear scope, decent margins, and your workers are ready to roll. You’ve blocked your schedule, lined up materials, and mobilized. Then the owner pulls the plug. Maybe they stopped paying, refused to proceed, or walked away. You have a signed contract in your hand promising payment, and you turned down other work expecting this project to move forward. What can you do? Can you recover the profit you were counting on?

I. Breach of Contract and Recovering Lost Profits

If an owner backs out or materially breaches a construction contract, North Carolina law generally allows the contractor to recover the profit they expected to earn on that contract. This is part of the standard “benefit of the bargain” damages for breach of contract. The goal is to put the contractor in the same position they would have occupied had the deal gone forward. In practice, the contractor’s lost profit is usually calculated as the contract price minus the costs the contractor would have incurred to complete the work. In other words, a contractor is entitled to the net profit (not gross revenue) they would have made, after accounting for expenses saved by not having to perform the job. For example, if a contractor had a $200,000 contract and it would have cost them $180,000 in labor, materials, and overhead to build the project, the lost profits (gross revenue) would be about $20,000. This assumes, of course, that the owner’s cancellation constitutes a breach (more on this below).

Read more

By Todd A. Jones

Woodson claims are wrongful death tort actions arising from workplace injuries, typically brought outside the scope of workers’ compensation. Originating from the seminal case Woodson v. Rowland, 329 N.C. 330, 407 S.E.2d 222 (1991), these claims frequently arise in the context of construction accidents and involve egregious employer misconduct. Typically, parties injured at work can only bring claims under workers’ compensation, and not tort actions, such as for wrongful death. North Carolina recognizes a narrow exception that permits tort claims for workplace injuries caused by an employer’s intentional misconduct or “conduct that, while not categorized as an intentional tort, was nonetheless substantially certain to cause serious injury or death to the employee.” Valenzuela v. Pallet Express, Inc., 207 N.C. App. 364, 367, 700 S.E.2d 76, 79 (2010) (citing Whitaker v. Town of Scotland Neck, 357 N.C. 552, 556, 597 S.E.2d 665, 667 (2003)).

Read more

By Jeffrey M. Reichard

Recent tariffs imposed by the Trump administration on foreign imports — and the retaliatory tariffs from China and other nations — are poised to drive up the cost of construction materials. This raises a critical question: who in the contracting chain bears the risk of these escalating prices? Is it the project owner, general contractor, subcontractor, or material supplier?

The answer typically depends on the contractual agreements between the parties and the stage of the project when the price increase or tariff is introduced. For example, once a binding fixed-price contract has been executed, obtaining additional compensation for cost increases becomes far more challenging. However, regardless of the project phase, contracting parties can take steps to mitigate their exposure to price escalations.

Read more